Where to find the mind: identifying the scale of cognitive dynamics
Pages 277 - 284
Abstract
There are ongoing divisions in the learning sciences between perspectives that treat cognition as occurring within individual minds and those that treat it as irreducibly distributed or situated in material and social contexts. We contend that accounts of individual minds as complex systems are theoretically continuous with distributed and situated cognition. On this view, the difference is a matter of the scale of the dynamics of interest, and the choice of scale can be informed by data. In this paper, we propose heuristics for empirically determining the scale of the relevant cognitive dynamics. We illustrate these heuristics in two contrasting cases, one in which the evidence supports attributing cognition to a group of students and one in which the evidence supports attributing cognition to an individual.
References
[1]
Anderson, J. R., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Situative versus cognitive perspectives: Form versus substance. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 18--21.
[2]
Bateson, G. (1985). A Theory of Play and Fantasy. Semiotics: An Introductory Anthology.
[3]
Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 13.
[4]
Conlin, L. D., Gupta, A., Scherr, R. E., & Hammer, D. The Dynamics of Students' Behaviors and Reasoning during Collaborative Physics Tutorial Sessions. Red, 24(15), 4.
[5]
Dennett, D. (1991). Consciousness Explained. LOCATION: the Penguin Press.
[6]
diSessa, A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. Constructivism in the computer age, 49--70.
[7]
Dorigo, M., & Stüützle, T. (2004). Ant colony optimization: the MIT Press.
[8]
Frank, B. W., Kanim, S. E., & Gomez, L. S. (2008). Accounting for variability in student responses to motion questions. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 4(2), 20102.
[9]
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
[10]
Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5.
[11]
Grice, P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words: Harvard Univ Pr.
[12]
Hammer, D., Elby, A., Scherr, R. E., & Redish, E. F. (2005). Resources, framing, and transfer. Transfer of learning: Research and perspectives. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
[13]
Hutchins, E. (1995). How a cockpit remembers its speeds. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 19(3), 265--288.
[14]
Kennedy, J., & Eberhart, R. (1995). Particle swarm optimization.
[15]
Lave, J., Murtaugh, M., & De La Rocha, O. (1984). The dialectic of arithmetic in grocery shopping. Everyday cognition: Its development in social context, 67--94.
[16]
Minsky, M. (1988). The society of mind: Simon & Schuster.
[17]
Mirollo, R., & Strogatz, S. (1990). Synchronization of pulse-coupled biological oscillators. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 50(6), 1645--1662.
[18]
Scherr, R. E., & Hammer, D. (2009). Student Behavior and Epistemological Framing: Examples from Collaborative Active-Learning Activities in Physics. Cognition and Instruction, 27(2), 147.
[19]
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational researcher, 27(2), 4.
[20]
Tannen, D. (1993). Framing in discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
[21]
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Recommendations
The causal mind: An affordance-based account of causal engagement
Causal cognition is a core aspect of how we deal with the world; however, existing psychological theories tend not to target intuitive causal engagement that is done in daily life. To fill this gap, we propose an Ecological-Enactive (E-E) affordance-...
Beyond Mind: How Brains Make up Artificial Cognitive Systems
What I call semiotic brains are brains that make up a series of signs and that are engaged in making or manifesting or reacting to a series of signs: through this semiotic activity they are at the same time engaged in "being minds" and so in thinking ...
Mind the theoretical gap: interpreting, using, and developing behavioral theory in HCI research
CHI '13: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsResearchers in HCI and behavioral science are increasingly exploring the use of technology to support behavior change in domains such as health and sustainability. This work, however, remain largely siloed within the two communities. We begin to address ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
June 2010
1190 pages
- Conference Chairs:
- Susan Goldman,
- James Pellegrino,
- Editors:
- Kimberly Gomez,
- Leilah Lyons,
- Joshua Radinsky
Publisher
International Society of the Learning Sciences
Publication History
Published: 29 June 2010
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 307 of 307 submissions, 100%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 64Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 22 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in